Gordo's Fish-Fucking Ways, In Legislative Detail

Yesterday, we disinterred a TV ad Gordon Smith would probably prefer you'd forgotten about, featuring Klamath Basin farmers praising Smith for dealing with the bureaucrats and getting their water turned back on. Given the stink that's settling over the decision process to overrule the Endangered Species Act, Smith should want no part of a record where he eagerly took credit for getting the water going again, after having appealed directly to President Bush and Karl Rove for help. Alas, he hasn't had to answer many questions about that record...yet.

The supporters in the Smith ad praise him for not taking No for an answer, and certainly when not practicing his apparent evening job as a species hydrologist, Smith spent many days in Congress during the 107 Congress coming up with any number of ways to denude or subvert the intention of the Endangered Species Act, the mission of which is simply to prevent species from becoming extinct. We have not given this compendium of Smith bill activity during 2001 and 2002 the absolute fine-toothed comb treatment, but then again we haven't had to, in order to find any number of ham-handed ways he tried to lean the process in favor of the farmers and not existing law or the latest science.

For instance--remember I told you about the codicile Smith had placed in a bill in 2001, attempting to automatically elevate peer-reviewed data over that which was not? It sounds innocuous, but that was precisely the premise used by the National Academy of Sciences panel to refuse consideration of the "Hardy Phase II" flow study the original water decisions were based on. Because the study was considered a "draft," the NAS panel ruled in January 2002 that they could not accept it as the best available science. And on February 5, Smith tried to codify that very premise into not just a clause on another bill, but into its own law. (And before I leave the subject of that prior codicile, the rest of the bill also sought to bypass a mandatory Secretary of Interior review when planned actions potentially threatened critical habitat. Nice.)

Smith led the charge in compensating farmers and water distributors who lost money during the shortage, and most of the state delegation surely felt obligated to join him. Colleague Ron Wyden cosigned onto a bill to reimburse the water assessment fees and lost revenue to water providers who'd experienced shutoffs in the spring of 2001. However, even though the water was soon turned back on, everybody was also credited back for the whole year, to the tune of $5 million.

My favorite manipulation of the US Code to get money to Klamath farmers was in August 2001. Smith proposed to include under natural disaster relief status "any application of the Endangered Species Act that, in the determination of the President, causes economic hardship of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under this Act.'" As in, say, giving water to fish under ESA instead of farmers. Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and failed potato crops from rerouting the water--you know, natural disasters.

Just in general, Smith seemed to have it in for the fish. Apparently he didn't want Indian tribes messing things up for the farmers either; he proposed that if the Secretary of Interior designated a migrating fishway that utilities then had to account for, he or she then had to listen to proposed alternatives to the fishway, despite having already reached the conclusion to have the fishway in order to protect the habitat. He doesn't even want them spawning, dammit!

Heck, even as far back as 1998, Smith (and his House counterpart at the time Bob Smith) were threatening the government that they couldn't accept the idea that fish might get water when farmers don't:

"The Interior Department's latest water use plan is not the answer. We should keep working with the federal government to find a balance that recognizes the economic needs of southern Oregonians. This plan just doesn't get us there. It threatens our collaborative efforts and the Klamath Basin's agricultural community," Chairman Smith said.

"The Klamath Basin community has made significant inroads toward resolving difficult water rights problems in the region. A heavy hand from the federal government will only frustrate this progress. Water use in southern Oregon is too important to settle for what is at best a divisive issue," Senator Smith said.

But the king-daddy of them all, his 9th Symphony of legislative effort, was Amendment 899 to the House Interior appropriations bill of 2001. His speech on the floor dramatizes just where he's coming from when the contest is fish vs farmers, science vs emotion. His proposal? Ignore the decision and court rulings; go back to the way it was 10 years ago, when the fish didn't get first crack at the water, the farmers did. That's it--just turn back the clock and pretend no rulings or evaluative science had ever occurred. The amendment failed, but just barely, 52-48. Ballsy as it is, it may have been the most legislatively rational thing he tried. He recognized the ESA rulings as anathema to his goals, so he proposed simply repealing it. Honest, maybe, but we can still hold him accountable.

Some extended snippets from the Congressional Record as Smith introduced his amendment to turn back time to a simpler era, when we didn't give a shit if the fish lived or died, as long as people could grow potatoes (bless you Thomas.gov):

I am the first Senator to be elected from Oregon who comes from its rural parts--eastern Oregon--in 70 years. I represent all of my State, but I have a special passion to represent those rural parts that I have watched be devastated for too long by Federal action. I believe the Endangered Species Act is a noble act with noble purposes, but I believe it is being used by some to very ignoble ends.

My actions today are not to subvert the Endangered Species Act. This is not reform. This is an act asking that its terms be implemented in a way that will relieve genuine human suffering in a way that may prevent the violence that has already been visited upon Federal property in a contest between farmers and the Bureau of Reclamation for the essential ingredient to life in the West, and that is water.

What has happened to the community of Klamath Falls, by conservative estimates, will cost that county $200 million. I thank the Senator from West Virginia, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and others, who helped me to get $20 million of relief to these people. Obviously, it is 10 percent of what is needed, even by conservative estimates.

.........

But now what we are doing is we are raising this lake 3 feet--it is a very big lake, very shallow, but it is being raised 3 feet--and cutting off all the water to farmers and fowl. It is being done to save the suckerfish, and now, while it is being saved, it is warming up. So the coho salmon that will soon be returning expecting to receive the cool waters of the Klamath will receive waters the temperature of a swimming pool. So, potentially, even the coho salmon--which is also a listed species--could be adversely affected by this biological opinion.

Well, there are two agencies of the Federal Government that are competing. One biological opinion is Fish and Wildlife with regard to the suckerfish. The other is the biological opinion of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Commerce Department that affects the coho salmon.

Both biological opinions essentially ask for 100 percent of the water which means cutting off 100 percent of the people.

The point I want to make is that would not be necessary if the Federal Government over the last 8 years would have kept its part of the bargain and done what it could to mitigate the impact to the sucker so that farmers would not be victimized.

What I do is simply reinstate the previous biological opinions that were in effect before this spring until the Federal Government can complete action on numerous recommendations of its 1993 recovery plan. Again, they were not acted upon over the last 8 years. Why? They say budgetary reasons.

I want this to be a priority. I want the budget to fix this problem. I do not want the whole budget burden thrown on the backs of rural people, but that is what was decided to be done.

.......

This is the land, the valley. I do not know whether my colleagues can see it, but this couple is overlooking the Klamath Basin--farms being developed, hay being raised, corn being raised, potatoes being raised that fill our shelves today. Look at the hopes and dreams in the faces of these people.

This is a little girl at an assembly of people at a rally a few weeks ago. Her sign says: ``Mommy says I can't eat, but fish can.''

That is what we are driving them to, and it is not right because they are being told they are of lesser value under our law than the shortnosed sucker.

This is a picture of the shortnosed sucker. It is a bottom-feeding fish. It lives in this shallow lake. It has gone through many droughts along with the farmers. It has survived, stressed, I am sure, just as humans are stressed in conditions of drought.

I am not saying this fish has no value. I have never thought the suckerfish is very good looking, but it has a mother, and that mother, I am sure, loves this fish. I know the Native Americans in this area value this fish, and I am not suggesting in any way that we are not interested in saving this fish.

I am saying the purpose of the Endangered Species Act was not to engage in a process of rural cleansing, of throwing off their property people who had been given great promise and hope for the future. They are meeting the mailmen with foreclosure notices because the Federal Government decided it is going to breach its promise.

Novick 6th-highest 2Q Earner on ActBlue

Not to construe it to mean that Steve Novick is a national fundraising monster, given the fact that (for instance) Barack Obama took in about $15 million in online donations and almost none of it came through ActBlue--but here are the stats for top ten dollar recipients in Q2 at that quickly-growing site:

Top candidates by $ raised (Q2)

amount | candidate
----------+------------------
883,656 | John Edwards
134,904 | John Kerry
128,215 | Jared Polis
107,483 | Joseph Sestak Jr
103,264 | Tim Johnson
101,689 | Steve Novick
97,000 | Chellie Pingree
77,677 | Niki Tsongas
74,254 | Mark Leno
70,377 | Jamie Eldridge

In addition, with 501 donors he falls just out of the top ten in that category, given that #10 is BlogPac (our new favorite friends, and we'll tell you why soon) with 548.

If you made a contribution to Steve's campaign in order to boost his 2Q showing, well done. And thank you! We'll be talking to you in 3 months... :)

Golden More Likely To Run--Now That He's Out of Work

From the Ashland Tidings, which has to be enjoying the attention, this web item about radio host Jeff Golden's calendar suddenly being totally freed up:

Ron Kramer, executive director of JPR, said after the Daily Tidings first reported that Golden is considering a run for the U.S. Senate, the station and Golden “reached a mutual agreement that it was not feasible for him to continue” hosting “The Jefferson Exchange.”

Kramer said he was “entirely unaware” that Golden, a former Jackson County commissioner, had political aspirations until Tuesday, the day before the Tidings ran its front page story.

Does this sound entirely mutual? I think somebody panicked. But it's true; the smart move is definitely to disassociate with any free media voice you have while acting as a candidate.

Shouldn't someone tell that to ABC in reference to Fred Thompson, who blogs on happily as late as yesterday? Golden was just thinking out loud, for all we know, and may never have decided to run if not for being essentially fired. Thompson has an exploratory committee, and yet he's still an ABC go-to guy. I love our media!

We'll try to get a hold of Jeff and see if this has caused his plans to coalesce. Some choose runs, and some have runs thrust upon them...

Summer of Steve! Day 4--Enviro Warrior Edition

[putting the money shot at the top--give to Steve Novick's campaign today, to show the Democratic establishment that Oregonians believe in a new, people-oriented direction for the Senate...remember, if you file taxes in Oregon you can get a $50 credit per person for your contributions in each year. It's like the first $50 is free!]

We're on Day 4 of our 6-day drive to the finish of 2Q fundraising, Steve's first quarter as a federal candidate. Here's what he has to say about why it's so important for you to give this week if you're thinking of giving:

We have forty-eight hours to prove our strength. Forty-eight hours to show that this campaign is not a long shot, but a juggernaut.

Forty-eight hours to show that we are the campaign to dislodge Gordon Smith ... who this week struck another blow against working Oregonians with his vote against the Employee Free Choice Act.

As I mentioned the other day, Saturday, June 30 is the end of our first FEC reporting period. We will be judged by how much money we have raised as of that date. We've raised a mess of money already, from over 500 of you. But we can be, we must be, even more impressive.

Some of you have already given all that you can afford, and for that, I thank you profusely. But if you think you could help a little more, or can find someone else who would - now is the time. Go to http://www.novickforsenate.com/... and start hitting buttons.

Thank you so much for everything you have done and will do. It really does matter...

Amen. And to continue our pattern of comparing and contrasting Steve with el Gordo on the issues, look no further than our story this morning on the latter's active participation in putting politics before science. There's no official comment from Steve at this time on those revelations, but his record on the environment speaks for itself:

After stops in law firms in New York and San Francisco, Steve joined the Environment Division (then known as the "Land and Natural Resources Division") of the United States Justice Department in 1987. He brought successful lawsuits against polluters for violations of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. He also served as lead counsel in the notorious Love Canal case. On that case in 1995, Steve and his team negotiated a settlement in which Occidental Chemical repaid the taxpayers $129 million in cleanup costs and interest. Announcing the settlement, Attorney General Janet Reno said: "Today we celebrate a transformation of an environmental disaster called Love Canal into a success story .... It [the settlement] stands for the principle that when people make a mess, they should pay to clean it up."

If the environment is your big issue, this race is no contest. Vote Hook!

Another Challenger for Gordo?

Chris Rizo at the Ashland Daily Tidings has the scoop:

Jefferson Public Radio talk-show host Jeff Golden of Ashland is considering a run for U.S. Senate.

While insiders said he is interested in the Democratic contest, Golden downplayed the speculation Monday, saying "it's too early" and "no firm decision has been made" on whether he will run.

A member of Golden's inner circle, who insisted on anonymity, said Golden's campaign announcement would unlikely come before September, if at all.

Paulie Brading, chair of the Jackson County Democratic Central Committee, said Monday that she has heard of Golden's political aspirations "from a variety of people," including Golden.

The Democratic National Senatorial Committee, she said, has done extensive polling in the state in hopes of finding a candidate to unseat Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, the GOP's only West Coast senator.

Golden, 57, an author and host of JPR's weekday radio show "The Jefferson Exchange," was a Jackson County commissioner from 1987 through 1990.

He was the target of an unsuccessful recall attempt spearheaded by logging interests in 1989, and was married to former longtime Ashland Mayor Cathy Shaw, now an A-list Democratic strategist in Southern Oregon.

Golden left the county executive board in 1990 to run for state Senate, narrowly losing to fourth-term Republican incumbent Lenn Hannon of Ashland.

Soon after, he took a job as chief of staff for then-state Senate President Bill Bradbury, D-Bandon. Bradbury is now secretary of state, Oregon's chief elections officer.

The more the merrier! I know little to nothing about Golden, but every new voice talking about why Gordo needs to be replaced is fine with us.

If you have stories/news about Golden and/or his potential run, share it with us in comments...

Update, 6/28 3pm--
Chris has more today on Golden, including an assessment of his chances by none other than Alan Bates--who appears to have company in the "Dem candidate from Southern Oregon" sweepstakes, and doesn't seem to like it much.

Smith Takes Another Poll Hit--Time for More Anti-War Posturing

These days Gordon Smith resembles nothing so much as a crab in a slowly warming pot--clearly getting uncomfortable, but with no good ideas on how to get himself out of the situation. And today's news brings word that the water temperature is rising.

First, a splash of background. As you may have seen via BlueO yesterday, over the weekend Smith enlisted the help of columnist George Will to re-burnish his moderate bona fides, with another attempt to make it seem like Smith is against the war. Will updated Smith's desperate meme on ABC's Sunday talk by declaring him the vanguard leader of disaffected Republicans:

George Stephanopoulus: Senator Smith told you that he believes he has, what?, about a dozen Republicans who will then join him in calling for a timetable for withdrawal?

George Will:
Well, that's what he said. That they will be where he is. And that is where he is.

The Republicans are scheduled, frankly, the way they talk, to panic in September. As in a way, they ought to. They're looking at another election on Iraq, and they'll be picking up the Republican Party in pieces with tweezers.

Your lips to God's ears, George--be sure to tell him this part, from your column:

“Smith has endorsed John McCain's presidential campaign. But the core of McCain's campaign is the puzzling doctrine that if we do not win in Iraq ‘they will follow us home.’ The global threat of terrorism cannot be defeated in Iraq, so, will terrorists not ‘follow us home’ only if U.S. forces continue to engage them in Iraq — where Gen. David Petraeus says there can be no military solution to that nation's afflictions? If so, that implies a need for endless engagement in Iraq, which is not a politically possible option.”

So Will is puzzled, too--and here he doesn't even mention the fact that Smith's most recent vote to fully fund the war was right in line with McCain doctrine. The folks at DPO didn't miss it, though:

“I remember the last time Gordon Smith pulled this stunt,” DPO Executive Director Trent Lutz said. “Last December, after telling as many reporters as he could find that he opposed the war, Senator Smith retreated to the senate chamber and continued voting for the conflict. By consistently voting for the war while telling the public he opposes it, he has lost all credibility with Oregonians. Who is going to believe him now?”

Good question--and the answer appears to be "not as many as before."

This month's Survey USA Senate tracking poll data is out, and the news continues to worsen for Oregon's junior Senator. Last month we did an extensive analysis of the numbers, showing you that Smith had fallen under 50% approval for the first time in a while at 48%, just shy of his 2-year low. However, the gap between approve and disapprove remained steady, at plus-9 or plus-10 for several months in a row.

For May the effect reversed itself--this time the approval number held fairly steady at 47%, but disapprovals jumped six points in a month (from 39% in May) to slash the gap to just two points, at 47-45. When you consider that he was at a healthy plus-28 just six months ago (58/30 in January), that is a tremendous overall drop. Also note that the net approval since January is -11, but the disapproval is +15, meaning that some folks who previously hadn't made up their minds are beginning to reach some conclusions--and they are not good for Gordo. (The "not sure" category has fluctuated back and forth a number of times, so the shift away from that choice may not be permanent).

We told you last time that much of the drop for Smith came from Republicans and non-affiliated voters. This time the GOP has taken Gordo back into the fold a bit, jumping their approval from 55% to 60%--but the news is worse for Smith among Democrats and NAVs. For surveyed Dems, opinions did a symmetrical flip: approval was down five points to 42; disapproval up five to 50, with a net approval loss of 10 points for the Senator. This shift has to be enormously soothing to the DPO and potential Democratic candidates, because in January Smith's approval stood at a whopping 62% among Dems. The 20-point cratering suggests that if they were initially fooled by Smith's pandering on the war, they've gotten over it.

Results among independents show a continued pattern of fluctuation from month to month...and it's another down month for Smith. His approvals within this group are essentially the same (46% down from 47%), but the disapprovals are up to 46% as well, six points more than last month and taken almost entirely from last month's "not sure" pile. Given the general national concordance between Dems and NAV's on the subject of the war, it may be no surprise that both groups saw a surge of decisiveness that trended towards the negative when evaluating Smith.

The other apparent driver for these numbers is the drop among people from places outside the Portland Metro area. As with Dems and NAVs, the recent movement is not so much a fall in approval as a spike in disapproval, fed by hardening opinions. Non-Portlanders went from 40% disapproval last month to 47%, an unusually large surge. Respondents beyond Portland have cut 11 points from his approvals just since March, added 14 points to his disapprovals--and have turned a plus-24 net approval into June's negative-1.

This may be the most troubling bleed of all for Gordo; as we said last time, if he can't figure out a way to motivate voters who aren't from the Big Three counties (Multno, WashCo, ClackaCo) he is severely cooked. And what this iteration of the SUSA survey set shows us is that his Extreme Congressional Makeover has not ended up helping his numbers long-term...and if these latest stats in the month after his vote to fully fund the war until September are any indication, the persistence with which Smith is trying to claim anti-war ground while voting the opposite way might just be starting to annoy some people. The DPO sees the hypocrisy pretty clearly:

“Gordon Smith has voted more than 20 times to authorize and fund the Iraq War and launched two media campaigns to convince Oregonians he opposes it. It does not matter how many reporters he talks to nor how slick his quotes are, he can’t hide his voting record in support of the Iraq War.”

Lose Cruise: Unpopular Sen Raises $ For Our Vulnerable One

Thank goodness that while Gordo works very hard to burnish his moderate image among Oregonians, ultimately he can't escape the fact that he's a member of the Bush-enabling crew who have put us in this handbasket the last six years. So while he's personally richer than 90 of his colleagues, there's no sense in putting that money into his re-election race if someone else will do it for him--and apparently it doesn't really matter who that someone is. From the increasingly on-the-ball DPO:

Voting to continue funding the Iraq War last month was not enough of a slap in the face to Oregonians for U.S. Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR).

Now he’s bringing in a fellow Bush loyalist and ardent Iraq War supporter to bolster his campaign coffers.

United States Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will raise campaign funds for Smith on a cruise tomorrow evening on the Willamette River.

“Rather than using their seats of power to resolve Iraq and end this war, senators Smith and McConnell continue to support President Bush and continue to fund the Iraq War,” DPO Chair Meredith Wood Smith said. “Before they board that boat on Saturday, Smith and McConnell should apologize for continuing to fund this war and pledge to stop funding this conflict.”

McConnell’s blind support for President Bush and the Iraq War mirror Smith’s record.

Both Smith and McConnell vote with President Bush at least 90 percent of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly.

And McConnell – unlike Smith - is honest about it.

While Smith publicly claims to oppose the war, but then votes for it, McConnell votes for the war and is open about his unrelenting commitment to staying in Iraq. [emph mine]

If you aren't a total politics junkie like we are, you might not know that McConnell is starting to struggle in his home state of Kentucky. Oregon's own John Singer at national blog MyDD has the scoop:

...McConnell is in much worse of a position than many might imagine a Republican from a state seemingly trending towards the GOP might be. To get an idea of this, just take a look at the skewed polling McConnell commissioned to make people believe he is in a stronger position than he is actually in. Safe incumbents just don't do this type of thing. What's more, not only does McConnell have troubles broadly within the Kentucky electorate, he also potentially faces a primary challenge, indicating a possibly underwhelming level of support from within his own party.

So regardless of whether Kentucky Democrats settle on Stumbo -- or businessman Charlie Owen, former congressional candidate Andrew Horne (both of whom Gerth mentions in his article) or someone else -- the Democrats have a real shot at defeating Mitch McConnell this cycle. And at the least, there is a clear opportunity for giving McConnell a good enough scare that he has to curtail his obstructionism and stay at home in his state rather than travel and raise money for other candidates.

Well, apparently he's not TOO scared just yet; the Willamette stands to get a little sludgier this weekend. But the mere fact that he's coming means that a) the NRSC likely thinks he needs to; and b) look who Gordo is turning to, in order to fill his campaign chest. If Bush came to raise money for him, people would understandably be turned off. Mitch McConnell is THE paramount defender of the President's policies for his Senate caucus, and is essentially the #3 man in the party. Isn't having one of the President's prime proxies come to town almost as bad as the real deal?